Asked by: Lord Banner (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what record they have of the annual financial cost of the badger culls in England over the past five years, and when a written value for money analysis of that cost was last undertaken.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The cost of undertaking badger culling is paid for by industry. The Government pays for the licensing operation and monitoring, as well as the cost of policing culls.
Information on the Government badger control costs for 2022 and previous years is available at GOV.UK. The Government badger control costs for 2023 will be published in due course.
The most recent value for money analysis of the badger control policy was published on 28 October 2022. This can be found attached to this answer.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government when they intend to publish any reports from their newly launched environmental science network focusing on deep-sea mining, DSM Environmental Network.
Answered by Lord Benyon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
On 19 February, we opened the new UK Deep-Sea Mining (DSM) Environmental Science Network to applications. The aims of the network are to recognise and promote the extensive and world-renowned UK expertise in environmental and natural science related to DSM. The Network will not be responsible for developing policy or providing advice or recommendations to the Government or Ministers. Rather, it will help fill the current evidence gaps on the environmental impact of DSM, coordinate research effectively and strategically, make sure UK research is included in the global environmental evidence base for DSM, and encourage conversations between the Government and the scientific community to raise awareness and coordination between DSM science and policy environmental issues.
Asked by: Samantha Dixon (Labour - City of Chester)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the impact of flooding on food production in the last four months.
Answered by Mark Spencer - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
We recognise that the recent period of wet weather has impacted UK agriculture. While the current market assessment is that this will impact the domestic production of certain foods, it is too early to predict the impact on overall consumer supply at this stage. However, the UK has a highly resilient food supply chain which allows us to use international trade to supplement any fluctuations in domestic food supply and maintain overall food security.
Asked by: Caroline Lucas (Green Party - Brighton, Pavilion)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if he will publish the names of the members of his Department’s expert committee that is responsible for reviewing Natural England’s advice regarding licencing applications to release non-native gamebirds.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
In 2023, Defra established an expert panel to advise on individual licence applications to release common pheasant or red legged partridge on or within 500m of Special Protection Areas for birds. The panel consisted of experts in exotic disease control and epidemiological risk from Defra and the Animal and Plant Health Agency.
Asked by: Lord Trees (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government when they will specify the relevant activities which will be proscribed under legislation to enable compliance with, and enforcement of, the Animals (Low-Welfare Activities Abroad) Act 2023.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Animals (Low-Welfare Activities Abroad) Act 2023 provides a framework for the introduction of future bans on the advertising and offering for sale, in England and Northern Ireland, of low-welfare animal activities abroad.
Future decisions on which specific animal activities will fall in scope of the advertising ban will be evidence-based and subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. Sufficient, compelling evidence will be required to demonstrate why any specific advertising ban is needed.
This Government continues to make animal welfare a priority and we are currently exploring a number of options to ensure progress as soon as is practicable.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they have taken to ensure that (1) border infrastructure is fully prepared, and (2) there are sufficient staff in place, to handle the increased controls on food and agricultural products starting from 30 April.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Government has worked with port and airport operators, traders, Port Health Authorities and the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) to make sure we have the right infrastructure, systems and resources in place.
This has culminated in recent months with an extensive period of operational testing. Collaborating with several ports, Port Health Authorities, APHA and traders, we have used these tests to identify and resolve any remaining operational issues.
We are confident that Border Control Posts infrastructure has sufficient capacity and capability to handle the volume of checks expected under the Border Target Operating Model. We are confident our systems are robust, dynamic, and effective, and we are confident inspection authorities are appropriately staffed and trained.
Asked by: Judith Cummins (Labour - Bradford South)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if he will make an assessment of the adequacy of existing legislation to tackle common nuisances such as (a) smoke, (b) bonfires, (c) smells and fumes, (d) accumulation of rubbish, (e) infestations and (f) litter.
Answered by Robbie Moore - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Local authorities are the main enforcers of the statutory nuisance regime under the Environmental Protection Act, 1990. The Government considers that any issues that could be the cause of statutory nuisance, including smoke, bonfire and smells are best dealt with at a local level. Local authorities need to be able to take account of local circumstances when determining how best to apply the powers available to them, such as issuing abatement orders.
Owners of industrial, trade and business premises are expected to use the best practicable means available to reduce smoke, smells and fumes and other potential sources of statutory nuisance emanating from their place of work in the first place.
The Environmental Protection Act 1990 also sets out clear responsibilities for local authorities with regards to keeping land clear of litter and refuse and provides them with strong enforcement powers to help them do this. Anyone caught littering or fly-tipping may be prosecuted which can lead to a significant fine or even imprisonment in the case of fly-tipping. Instead of prosecuting, councils may decide to issue a fixed penalty (on-the-spot fine). We increased the upper limit for fly-tipping and littering fixed penalties to £1000 and £500 respectively in July 2023 and as of 1 April 2024 councils must now reinvest income from these penalties in enforcement and clean up.
Additionally, we provide guidance on how councils can discharge their duties and use their enforcement powers and have recently consulted key stakeholders on putting our current litter enforcement guidance on a statutory footing.
The Secretary of State considers the current legislation provides local authorities with the necessary powers to deal with these types of nuisance issues.
Asked by: Ian Liddell-Grainger (Conservative - Bridgwater and West Somerset)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what criteria his Department use to assess whether to build solar farms on productive farmland.
Answered by Robbie Moore - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Planning decisions on solar development are granted by local planning authorities, or, where applications are for developments over 50MW, with the Secretary of State for Energy.
The National Planning Policy Framework sets out clearly that local planning authorities should consider all the benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, when making plans or taking decisions on new development proposals. Where significant development of agricultural land is shown to be necessary, planning authorities should seek to use poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality.
The recently published and updated National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out that planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland. Where significant development on agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, areas of poorer quality land should be preferred to those of a higher quality. The availability of agricultural land used for food production should be considered, alongside the other policies in the Framework, when deciding what sites are most appropriate for development.
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether he plans to make an assessment of the potential merits of measures to reduce the need to seize dogs which are likely to be exempted from Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.
Answered by Mark Spencer - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Dogs that are prohibited under section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 and which do not have a valid certificate of exemption could be seized by the Police.
In these cases, there is an interim exemption scheme which allows suspected prohibited dogs to remain with their owners in advance of a court hearing. It is for the Police to determine whether to make use of this scheme on a case-by-case basis.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether the new border import controls being introduced on 30 April will impact food safety standards between the UK and EU; and if so, how.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Border Target Operating Model (BTOM) introduces proportionate controls that will protect the agri-food sector and public health.
The implementation of controls on EU goods does not change the safety standards of imported food. It has reduced the risk of plant and animal pests and diseases reaching GB and potentially causing significant disruption to domestic production, as well as assuring the safety of all imported food.
The UK’s agri-food exports depend on our reputation for high regulatory standards, and the BTOM will provide our export markets with assurance that we are taking appropriate steps to protect our biosecurity, so that our exports will not present an increased risk to our trade partners’ biosecurity.